Can interprofessional education change students' attitudes? A case study from Lebanon.

BACKGROUND: Interprofessional collaboration is key to improving the health of individuals and communities. It is supported by provision of Interprofessional education (IPE) which has recently emerged in the Middle East region. This study investigated changes in healthcare students' attitudes towards interprofessional collaboration after undertaking the Interprofessional Education and Collaboration (IPEC) course. METHODS: A paper-based anonymous survey using the Interprofessional Attitude Scale (IPAS) was administered to a sample of 346 health students (nursing, medicine, and public health) pre/post undertaking the IPEC course. Less than half of the students provided a post response, with pre/post survey results of 111 pairs subsequently matched and analyzed. RESULTS: Results showed elevated pre-course scores, an improvement in students' attitudes towards the interprofessional biases domain of the IPAS, and a slight decline in their scores in the remaining 4 domains (team roles and responsibilities, patient centeredness, community centeredness, and diversity and ethics). These changes were not statistically significant, except for the patient centeredness domain (p = 0.003**). CONCLUSIONS: The study provided important results about attitudes towards interprofessional collaboration. These findings are essential because our institution is one of few in Lebanon that provides this mandatory course to a large group of health professionals. Future studies should investigate these changes in attitude scores in a larger sample size, and how these attitudes would influence collaboration post-graduation.

Risk Factors for SARS-CoV-2 Among a Cohort of Healthcare Workers in Lebanon.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers (HCWs) faced substantial risk of infection during the COVID-19 outbreak. This study aims to determine the prevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in a cross-sectional sample of HCWs as well as risk factors associated with exposure to SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: The study was conducted between March and May 2021 at the American University of Beirut Medical Center (AUBMC), a tertiary hospital located in Lebanon. Socio-demographic and clinical data, as well as data on exposure, PCR results, PPE adherence, and vaccination status, were collected using an online questionnaire. Sera were also collected to determine seropositivity using commercially available enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA) targeting the spike (S) and the nucleocapsid proteins (NCP) of SARS-CoV-2. FINDINGS: Among 92 recruited HCWs, 72.3% received PPE training, more than 70% were adherent to using appropriate PPEs, and around 80% were vaccinated. Nurses in this study population were at higher risk of exposure compared to medical doctors, technicians, and other HCWs. Among the HCWs who performed a PCR test, 28.6% were infected with SARs-CoV-2 with workplace exposure not associated with COVID-19 infection. All vaccinated HCWs were seropositive for anti-S IgG with high titer (≥384 BAU/mL), with a significantly higher median anti-S IgG titer compared to unvaccinated HCWs with previous infection (384 vs. 140.1 BAU/mL; p = .0043). CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the importance of implementing strict infection control policies among HCWs and deploying an effective COVID-19 vaccination strategy. More studies are needed in Lebanon to assess risk factors of SARS-CoV-2 exposure in the workplace.

Hospitals' Collaborations Strengthen Pandemic Preparedness: Lessons Learnt from COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic strained healthcare systems around the world. This study aims to understand the preparedness of private remote hospitals in Lebanon to respond to the pandemic and evaluate the impact of inter-hospital collaborations on the hospitals' readiness. METHODS: A multi-centered study was conducted between August 2020 and June 2021 in ten Lebanese private remote hospitals based on a mixed-methods embedded approach where the quantitative supported the qualitative. Through the AUB-USAID (American University of Beirut-United States Agency for International Development) COVID-19 project, these hospitals received personal protective equipment and medical equipment in addition to COVID-19-related training using the Train-the-Trainer model. The quantitative part used knowledge and evaluation questionnaires and a pre-post-intervention hospital preparedness checklist. The qualitative approach adopted semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample from key hospital personnel. Quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS version 27, and a p-value of <0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. For the qualitative data, a thematic analysis was performed by adopting the six-phase process described by Braun and Clarke. RESULTS: Of the 393 healthcare workers who attended the training and completed the evaluation questionnaire, 326 completed the pre- and post-training knowledge questionnaire. A significant improvement was observed in mean knowledge scores following training for infection control, nursing, and polymerase chain reaction sampling staff (p-value < 0.001, p-value < 0.001, and p-value = 0.006, respectively), but not for housekeeping staff. More than 93% of the participants showed high trainer and content evaluation scores. As for the hospitals' preparedness assessments, there was a clear improvement in the pre- and post-assessment scores for each hospital, and there was a significant difference in the mean of the total scores of partner hospitals pre- and post-USAID-AUB project (p-value = 0.005). These findings were supported by the qualitative analysis, where nine hospitals expressed the positive impact of the USAID-AUB intervention in improving their preparedness to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic at a critical time when it was highly needed. Despite the intervention, persistent challenges remained. CONCLUSIONS: A timely and proactive collaborative program between academic/tertiary care centers and remote community hospitals that includes sharing supplies and expertise is feasible and highly effective during public health emergencies.

COVID-19 Infections and Predictors of Sickness Related Absences Among Healthcare Workers: The Experience of a Tertiary Care Center With the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Little has been published on predictors of prolonged sick leaves during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aims to determine the rate of COVID-19 infections among healthcare workers (HCWs) and to identify the predictors of longer sick leave days. METHODS: We identified predictors of longer sick leave using linear regression analysis in a cross-sectional study design. RESULTS: Thirty-three percent of the total workforce contracted COVID-19. On average, HCWs took 12.5 sick leave days after COVID-19 infection. The regression analysis revealed that older employees, nurses, and those who caught COVID-19 earlier in the pandemic were more likely to take longer sick leave. CONCLUSIONS: Age, job position, and month of infection predicted sick leave duration among HCWs in our sample. Results imply that transmission was most likely community-based. Public health interventions should consider these factors when planning for future pandemics.

Anxiety Among Healthcare Workers During COVID-19 Pandemic in Lebanon: The Importance of the Work Environment and Personal Resilience.

Background: Healthcare workers (HCWs) have been severely impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition to their risk of direct exposure to the virus, they were subjected to long working hours, scarcity of PPE, and additional stressors that impacted their psychological wellbeing. The purpose of this study was to assess anxiety and its predictors among a sample of HCWs at the American University of Beirut Medical Center (AUBMC) and to evaluate the association between resilience and anxiety. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted using an online survey between March and June 2021 among HCWs at AUBMC. The psychosocial scale section included the 7-item generalized anxiety disorder (GAD-7) scale and a 25-item resilience scale, validated tools used to assess anxiety and resilience respectively. Data were analyzed on SPSS version 27, and descriptive statistics were applied. Predictors were evaluated using bivariate and multivariate linear regression. Results: From a total of 92 participants, 75% were involved in direct patient care, and of those, 95% worked directly with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 patients. The majority (83%) had minimal to mild anxiety, whereas the rest had moderate to high anxiety levels. Around 41% reported moderately high to high resilience, 47% were found to be between the low end and moderate resilience scale and only 12% had very low or low resilience. More than 80% of the participants received PPE training, reported always working with adequate preventive infection control measures, and were vaccinated. Further, more than 70% of participants reported trusting the management and agreed that the safety of the workers is considered a high priority. No significant association between sociodemographic and COVID-19 work exposure factors with anxiety was found. Multivariate analysis results showed that a lower anxiety score was associated with higher resilience (p = 0.011). Conclusion: This study has shown a strong association between low anxiety levels and high resilience scores in this group of mostly vaccinated HCWs caring for COVID-19 patients. The high percentage of vaccination along with PPE availability could explain the low anxiety levels reported among the participants.